Skip to main content
PMC home page
The British Journal of General Practice logoLink to The British Journal of General Practice
. 2002 Dec;52(485):1012–1020.

The relationship between consultation length, process and outcomes in general practice: a systematic review.

Andrew Wilson 1, Susan Childs 1
PMCID: PMC1314474  PMID: 12528590

Abstract

The aim of the study was to examine differences in consultation process and health outcomes between primary care physicians who consult at different rates. A systematic review of observational studies was carried out, restricted to English language journal papers reporting original research or systematic reviews. Qualitative analysis with narrative overview of methodology and key results was undertaken, using MEDLINE (1966 to 1999), EMBASE (1981 to 1999), and the NHS National Research Register. Secondary references from this search were also considered for inclusion. Main outcome measures were objectively measured process or healthcare outcomes. Thirteen papers, describing ten studies, were identified. There were consistent differences in several elements of process and outcome between general practitioners (GPs) who consult at different rates. Although average consultation length may be a marker of other doctor attributes, the evidence suggests that patients seeking help from a doctor who spends more time with them are more likely to have a consultation that includes important elements of care.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (88.0 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Andersson S. O., Ferry S., Mattsson B. Factors associated with consultation length and characteristics of short and long consultations. Scand J Prim Health Care. 1993 Mar;11(1):61–67. doi: 10.3109/02813439308994904. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Andersson S. O., Mattsson B. Features of good consultation in general practice: is time important? Scand J Prim Health Care. 1994 Dec;12(4):227–232. doi: 10.3109/02813439409029245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Andersson S. O., Mattsson B. Length of consultations in general practice in Sweden: views of doctors and patients. Fam Pract. 1989 Jun;6(2):130–134. doi: 10.1093/fampra/6.2.130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baker R. Characteristics of practices, general practitioners and patients related to levels of patients' satisfaction with consultations. Br J Gen Pract. 1996 Oct;46(411):601–605. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Baker R., Streatfield J. What type of general practice do patients prefer? Exploration of practice characteristics influencing patient satisfaction. Br J Gen Pract. 1995 Dec;45(401):654–659. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Baker R. The reliability and criterion validity of a measure of patients' satisfaction with their general practice. Fam Pract. 1991 Jun;8(2):171–177. doi: 10.1093/fampra/8.2.171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bensing J. M., van den Brink-Muinen A., de Bakker D. H. Gender differences in practice style: a Dutch study of general practitioners. Med Care. 1993 Mar;31(3):219–229. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199303000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Boulton M. G., Williams A. Health education in the general practice consultation: doctors' advice on diet, alcohol and smoking. Health Educ J. 1983;42(2):57–63. doi: 10.1177/001789698304200211. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Camasso M. J., Camasso A. E. Practitioner productivity and the product content of medical care in publicly supported health centers. Soc Sci Med. 1994 Mar;38(5):733–748. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90464-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Campbell S. M., Hann M., Hacker J., Burns C., Oliver D., Thapar A., Mead N., Safran D. G., Roland M. O. Identifying predictors of high quality care in English general practice: observational study. BMJ. 2001 Oct 6;323(7316):784–787. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7316.784. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Carr-Hill R., Jenkins-Clarke S., Dixon P., Pringle M. Do minutes count? Consultation lengths in general practice. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1998 Oct;3(4):207–213. doi: 10.1177/135581969800300405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Fleming D. M., Lawrence M. S., Cross K. W. List size, screening methods, and other characteristics of practices in relation to preventive care. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985 Sep 28;291(6499):869–872. doi: 10.1136/bmj.291.6499.869. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Freeborn D. K., Baer D., Greenlick M. R., Bailey J. W. Determinants of medical care utilization: physicians' use of laboratory services. Am J Public Health. 1972 Jun;62(6):846–853. doi: 10.2105/ajph.62.6.846. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Freeman George K., Horder John P., Howie John G. R., Hungin A. Pali, Hill Alison P., Shah Nayan C., Wilson Andrew. Evolving general practice consultation in Britain: issues of length and context. BMJ. 2002 Apr 13;324(7342):880–882. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7342.880. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. GELLER J., BORA R., ROBERTS T., NEWMAN H., LIN A., SILVA R. TREATMENT OF BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERTROPHY WITH HYDROXYPROGESTERONE CAPROATE: EFFECT ON CLINICAL SYMPTOMS, MORPHOLOGY, AND ENDOCRINE FUNCTION. JAMA. 1965 Jul 12;193:121–128. doi: 10.1001/jama.1965.03090020035009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Groenewegen P. P., Hutten J. B. The influence of supply-related characteristics on general practitioners' workload. Soc Sci Med. 1995 Feb;40(3):349–358. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)e0076-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Grol R., de Maeseneer J., Whitfield M., Mokkink H. Disease-centred versus patient-centred attitudes: comparison of general practitioners in Belgium, Britain and The Netherlands. Fam Pract. 1990 Jun;7(2):100–103. doi: 10.1093/fampra/7.2.100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hammersley Vicky, Hippisley-Cox Julia, Wilson Andrew, Pringle Mike. A comparison of research general practices and their patients with other practices--a cross-sectional survey in Trent. Br J Gen Pract. 2002 Jun;52(479):463–468. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hartzema A. G., Christensen D. B. Nonmedical factors associated with the prescribing volume among family practitioners in an HMO. Med Care. 1983 Oct;21(10):990–1000. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198310000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Heaney D. J., Howie J. G., Porter A. M. Factors influencing waiting times and consultation times in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1991 Aug;41(349):315–319. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Heaney David J., Walker Jeremy J., Howie John G. R., Maxwell Margaret, Freeman George K., Berrey Peter N. E., Jones Tom G., Stern Morag C., Campbell Stephen M. The development of a routine NHS data-based index of performance in general practice (NHSPPI). Fam Pract. 2002 Feb;19(1):77–84. doi: 10.1093/fampra/19.1.77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hopton J. L., Howie J. G., Porter A. M. The need for another look at the patient in general practice satisfaction surveys. Fam Pract. 1993 Mar;10(1):82–87. doi: 10.1093/fampra/10.1.82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hopton J. L., Porter A. M., Howie J. G. A measure of perceived health in evaluating general practice: the Nottingham Health Profile. Fam Pract. 1991 Sep;8(3):253–260. doi: 10.1093/fampra/8.3.253. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Howie J. G., Heaney D. J., Maxwell M., Walker J. J., Freeman G. K. Developing a 'consultation quality index' (CQI) for use in general practice. Fam Pract. 2000 Dec;17(6):455–461. doi: 10.1093/fampra/17.6.455. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Howie J. G., Heaney D. J., Maxwell M., Walker J. J., Freeman G. K., Rai H. Quality at general practice consultations: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):738–743. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.738. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Howie J. G., Heaney D. J., Maxwell M., Walker J. J., Freeman G. K., Rai H. Quality at general practice consultations: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):738–743. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.738. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Howie J. G., Hopton J. L., Heaney D. J., Porter A. M. Attitudes to medical care, the organization of work, and stress among general practitioners. Br J Gen Pract. 1992 May;42(358):181–185. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Howie J. G., Porter A. M., Forbes J. F. Quality and the use of time in general practice: widening the discussion. BMJ. 1989 Apr 15;298(6679):1008–1010. doi: 10.1136/bmj.298.6679.1008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Howie J. G., Porter A. M., Heaney D. J., Hopton J. L. Long to short consultation ratio: a proxy measure of quality of care for general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1991 Feb;41(343):48–54. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Howie J. Comment: do minutes count for quality in the general practice consultation? J Health Serv Res Policy. 1998 Oct;3(4):213–214. doi: 10.1177/135581969800300406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Hughes D. Consultation length and outcome in two group general practices. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1983 Mar;33(248):143–147. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Hulka B. S., Romm F. J., Parkerson G. R., Jr, Russell I. T., Clapp N. E., Johnson F. S. Peer review in ambulatory care: use of explicit criteria and implicit judgments. Med Care. 1979 Mar;17(3 Suppl):i-vi, 1-73. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Hull F. M., Hull F. S. Time and the general practitioner: the patient's view. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1984 Feb;34(259):71–75. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Knight R. The importance of list size and consultation length as factors in general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1987 Jan;37(294):19–22. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Korsch B. M., Negrete V. F. Doctor-patient communication. Sci Am. 1972 Aug;227(2):66–74. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0872-66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Kristiansen I. S., Mooney G. The general practitioner's use of time: is it influenced by the remuneration system? Soc Sci Med. 1993 Aug;37(3):393–399. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(93)90269-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Lassen L. C. Connections between the quality of consultations and patient compliance in general practice. Fam Pract. 1991 Jun;8(2):154–160. doi: 10.1093/fampra/8.2.154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Martin C. M., Banwell C. L., Broom D. H., Nisa M. Consultation length and chronic illness care in general practice: a qualitative study. Med J Aust. 1999 Jul 19;171(2):77–81. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1999.tb123525.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Mechanic D. How should hamsters run? Some observations about sufficient patient time in primary care. BMJ. 2001 Aug 4;323(7307):266–268. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7307.266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Mechanic D., McAlpine D. D., Rosenthal M. Are patients' office visits with physicians getting shorter? N Engl J Med. 2001 Jan 18;344(3):198–204. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200101183440307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Mechanic D. The orginization of medical practice and practice orientations among physicians in prepaid and nonprepaid primary care settings. Med Care. 1975 Mar;13(3):189–204. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197503000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Pineault R. The effect of prepaid group practice on physicians' utilization behavior. Med Care. 1976 Feb;14(2):121–136. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197602000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Richards H. M., Sullivan F. M., Mitchell E. D., Ross S. Computer use by general practitioners in Scotland. Br J Gen Pract. 1998 Aug;48(433):1473–1476. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Robbins J. A., Bertakis K. D., Helms L. J., Azari R., Callahan E. J., Creten D. A. The influence of physician practice behaviors on patient satisfaction. Fam Med. 1993 Jan;25(1):17–20. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Rosenblatt R. A., Moscovice I. S. The physician as gatekeeper. Determinants of physicians' hospitalization rates. Med Care. 1984 Feb;22(2):150–159. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198402000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Stolley P. D., Becker M. H., Lasagna L., McEvilla J. D., Sloane L. M. The relationship between physician characteristics and prescribing appropriateness. Med Care. 1972 Jan-Feb;10(1):17–28. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197201000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Stott N. C., Davis R. H. The exceptional potential in each primary care consultation. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1979 Apr;29(201):201–205. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Sullivan F., Mitchell E. Has general practitioner computing made a difference to patient care? A systematic review of published reports. BMJ. 1995 Sep 30;311(7009):848–852. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7009.848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Waitzkin H. Information giving in medical care. J Health Soc Behav. 1985 Jun;26(2):81–101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Williams S. J., Calnan M. Key determinants of consumer satisfaction with general practice. Fam Pract. 1991 Sep;8(3):237–242. doi: 10.1093/fampra/8.3.237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Wilson A. Consultation length in general practice: a review. Br J Gen Pract. 1991 Mar;41(344):119–122. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Winefield H. R., Murrell T. G., Clifford J. V., Farmer E. A. The usefulness of distinguishing different types of general practice consultation, or are needed skills always the same? Fam Pract. 1995 Dec;12(4):402–407. doi: 10.1093/fampra/12.4.402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. al-Faris E. A., al-Dayel M. A., Ashton C. The effect of patients' attendance rate on the consultation in a health centre in Saudi Arabia. Fam Pract. 1994 Dec;11(4):446–452. doi: 10.1093/fampra/11.4.446. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of General Practice are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners

RESOURCES